Wider Scope in Pre-War Probe Sought

By Walter Pincus, The Washington Post

Democrats on intelligence panel want right to question top policymakers.
Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee want the right to interview top policymakers or speechwriters as part of the inquiry into whether the Bush administration exaggerated or misused intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the panel's vice chairman, said yesterday.

Rockefeller raised the possibility of issuing subpoenas, and outlined a more wide-ranging approach than the one described by Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who said the work would center on comparing public statements by administration officials to intelligence reports circulating at the time. Rockefeller, Roberts and four other senators are to meet today to work out a schedule and process for the committee's review.

"Comparing public statements with what the intelligence community published does not alone tell the story," Rockefeller said in a statement yesterday. "If necessary, we may need to conduct interviews and request supporting documents." Rockefeller warned that "if the committee is denied testimony or documentation, we must be prepared to issue subpoenas."

Rockefeller's recommended approach also appears tougher than the one reflected in an agreement he and Roberts reached last year. At that time, they agreed to schedule the "Phase Two" of their inquiry into prewar intelligence, which would include some of the most sensitive issues, including whether the administration mischaracterized intelligence in public. That inquiry would review public statements, reports and testimony by U.S. government officials and determine whether they "were substantiated by intelligence information," according to a committee statement in February 2004.

It was to be a relatively simple process, as Roberts described it Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation." "You have the statements over here," he said. "Then you have the intelligence over here. And I want members to roll up their sleeves . . . and say, 'Okay, here's the statement, here's the intelligence. Is it credible?' "

Under last year's agreement, it was unclear whether the committee would consider whether there were contradictory or competing intelligence reports circulating at the time public statements were made that could call them into question, or whether the panel would simply check to see whether each statement could be backed up by at least one piece of intelligence.

For example, in a Sept. 8, 2002, appearance on CNN, Condoleezza Rice said Iraq was receiving "high-quality aluminum tubes that are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs." At the time, there were serious disagreements within the intelligence community over whether those tubes were meant for centrifuges - which can be used to extract weapons-grade uranium - or whether they were meant for anti-aircraft rockets, which proved to be the case. If it could be shown that there was at least one intelligence report that substantiated Rice's statement, that might be enough to justify her statement under terms of the panel's earlier agreement.

As one senior committee staff member put it, "This study will not punish 'cherry-picking' intelligence, whether by the administration or by Democrats."

Under Rockefeller's desired approach, Rice could be interviewed to ask her what intelligence she based her statements on, and whether she was aware of the contrary views.

Yesterday, a Senate staff member familiar with Roberts's views said he thinks it may not be necessary to interview anyone. "But if the committee members decide they need to speak to those involved, they can agree to do that," he added.

Rockefeller said that several new intelligence items need to be included in the Phase Two review that were not known when the committee released the first phase of its review more than a year ago. That phase centered on the quality of prewar intelligence, not on how the administration presented it publicly.

Rockefeller cited the Defense Intelligence Agency's report in 2002 that questioned the reliability of an al Qaeda captive whose information later became the foundation for allegations that Iraq was training Osama bin Laden operatives. Although the analysis of how the administration used intelligence has gotten the most publicity, it is only part of the committee's Phase Two study. Among other things, the panel also will compare prewar assessments on what would happen in postwar Iraq with what has occurred there, and it will examine how information provided by Iraqi defectors and exiles, including Ahmed Chalabi, were incorporated into intelligence analyses.

When I was in engineering school, I took several courses that dealt with sub-atomic particle theory. One of the things that was always fascinating to me was the concept of a "Bubble Chamber." Since you couldn't really "see" the particle's movement, another "view point" had to be utilized. That was the "Bubble Chamber." By shooting an accelerated particle into a "Bubble Chamber" you could see the patterns left by the particle and analyze those. Then, by using "interpolation" and "extrapolation" techniques you could successfully create a model of behavior and isolate the particle.

I find the same techniques useful in dealing with this PNAC NEOCON cabal "Shadow Government" that HG Wells, George Orwell, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Albert Camus, Jean Paul Sartre, Aldous Huxley, Robert Anton Wilson and Abbie Hoffman warned us about. It is very difficult to catch them "in the act", but by analyzing their swath of Patriarchal fascist destruction and coruption through our Free and Just Peaceful Democratic Society, we can analyze their techniques and patterns. . . and it ain't "rocket science", let me tell you. These guys are NOT that smart, they are just "Power-FULL" and mean-spirited due largely from their upbringing in the dysfunctional households of the "rich and famous." (The "Poisonous Pedagogy" described by Marion Woodman, Robert Bly and Alice Miller)

As the old saying goes, "Follow the Money". Add to that "Follow the Alliances" and "Follow the Power Shifts" (from Alvin Toffler). Let the phrase, "CUI BONO?" (Who Benefits?) be your compass. It is up to US, the Middle Class Saturdaze Kidz, to insure that this so called "Wider-Scope Investigation" doesn't turn into another "Warren Report" or "9/11 Commission Report" of total bullshit designed to protect the guilty rather than expose them.

As all the blogging "Saturdaze Kidz" know, all the "Patriarchal Grown Ups" are insane and will say anything/do anything to WIN at all costs. We know that the corporately owned Main Stream Media cannot be trusted to tell the truth since the demise of the "Fair and Balanced" doctrines and the 7-7-7 Media Ownership were destroyed by the 1996 Telecommunications Act (go back and look to see who sponsored this legislation . .. recognize the players? CUI BONO?)

Here is a nice piece of multi-media that addresses several "Objective Truth" points that have all but disappeared from the "Official Subjective Truths" of these rich frat brats of the New World Order of the PNAC NEOCONS.

"I look for truth and find that I get damned
But what is truth? Is truth unchanging law?
We both have truths - are mine the same as yours?"
- Trial Before Pilate from Jesus Christ Superstar by Rice & Webber

Submitted by objector to the TYRANNY (not verified) on Thu, 11/10/2005 - 5:34am.

Pat Roberts is one of the biggest roadblocks to justice and democracy in this country since republican's evolved from pond scum. It'd be nice to see the democrats in both the congress and senate start to rip up the sleazbag republicans who did everything in their power to sidetrack or derail the queries of the few decent democrats who have always challenged the validity of the "god told me to do it" crowd in the white house.

hoping that the '06 election will be a major blood-letting, mostly those republican's who have been every bit as treasonous and seditious as their scummy leader by aiding and abetting the criminality of the war in iraq, it'd also be nice to see a whole lot of fresh new INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES actually replace the old burned out lapdog democrats who have been pandering and performing fellatio to their republican buddies across the aisle.

back on my point though, Pat Roberts needs to be investigated by the Independent Counsel just like the rest of the vermin in the white house, for his role in running cover for them this long.

Informed Activist

Speaking Events

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.

User login

Username: *

Password: *

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.